MNCR 4909

In service and hooked up to the 4110. I saw it yesterday on 66 and 57. It has a slightly different horn than the others

waldwickrailfan wrote:In service and hooked up to the 4110. I saw it yesterday on 66 and 57. It has a slightly different horn than the others

Came down to Hoboken on train 48 this morning and could not make the turn to train 43. Not sure what the issue was.

Oy.. Another MN rebuild junker.. Didn't one of the other F40s have something up with the bearings and crankshaft?

Oy more rethoric from a non-railroader.......

steemtrayn wrote:I hear that 4908 has to go back...Bearings were installed wrong and the crankshaft is shot.

It was from awhile ago but still.

Ok fellas, the units were "double headed" because the 4909 was out of overhaul and 4110 had loading issues. The units were shopped yesterday AM because of traction issues. Still no idea if the problem was with the 4909 or 4110...

-NO BS

Dang it, 4110 is my favorite CNJ.

beanbag wrote:Oy.. Another MN rebuild junker.. Didn't one of the other F40s have something up with the bearings and crankshaft?

Not an F40, but rather the 4906 suffered a major failure within days of its return to service upon returning from rebuilding/overhaul. It required extensive repair and was OOS for several months.

Sirsonic wrote:

beanbag wrote:Oy.. Another MN rebuild junker.. Didn't one of the other F40s have something up with the bearings and crankshaft?

Not an F40, but rather the 4906 suffered a major failure within days of its return to service upon returning from rebuilding/overhaul. It required extensive repair and was OOS for several months.

Thats interesting, thanks for the info Sirsonic. I didnt know it had such a massive failure..

Pardon the bump, but wasn't 4193 only 7-8 years old (excluding Amtrak years)? I don't work for NJT/MNCR so I don't know a lot about her reliability.